GPX 6000 Running A 15x10" X-coil

[dig4gold]

10 hours ago, Steve Herschbach said:

If X Coil made a 6x10 for the 6000 and Minelab does not, I would be very tempted, even if it meant completely destroying an 11" mono in the process.

Steve, I think you will find the 11" coil can still be used with the made adapter. Just like I believe the ML 14 or 19 inch coil still could be once the adapter was made from what ever coil the user ended up using  to get the chip from. I noticed with all the fallout over the adapter drama for the GPZ 7000 to take X Coils that people kept on going on about the false & untrue comment that the ML coil used to get the chip from was then useless & a bin job. That just was not the case & was totally useable. I am sure people realise that now though. So your 11" is still totally useable by the sound of it too.

 

Greg   

[Steve Herschbach]

19 hours ago, Jonathan Porter said:

So far just about every post that has been made by past pro-vocalists on this thread has a cautionary alluding warning shot clearly aimed at participants from past discussions, I am more than happy to keep out of it if people stop constantly referring to past debates in a way that is suggestive of the actual discussions and outcomes being different to reality. 

How about everyone just let it go and move on, instead of alluding to the past at all? I am well over it, and if any nonsense starts up I’ll just delete it without comment. Nobody needs to bring up the past anymore. It’s over, in the rear view mirror… it does not exist at all except as images in memory. It’s chewing on old bones with no meat left on them.

[Steve Herschbach]

9 hours ago, dig4gold said:

Steve, I think you will find the 11" coil can still be used with the made adapter. Just like I believe the ML 14 or 19 inch coil still could be once the adapter was made from what ever coil the user ended up using  to get the chip from. I noticed with all the fallout over the adapter drama for the GPZ 7000 to take X Coils that people kept on going on about the false & untrue comment that the ML coil used to get the chip from was then useless & a bin job. That just was not the case & was totally useable. I am sure people realise that now though. So your 11" is still totally useable by the sound of it too.

 

Greg   

I understand that. I also don’t care if it did mean tossing an 11” coil away to get a coil I want. That was what I was saying, I was not saying anything else, nor alluding to anything else. Everyone on both sides needs to quit with the defensive posture, and quit reading things into posts that are not said. All these comments alluding to the past are just clogging up a good thread. So please everyone let this post be the last post referring to past x coil turmoil. That includes any responses to my posts about stopping all this!  Thanks.

[Chet]

Thinking of the present situation and a possible solution;

In the world of corporate profits Minelab probably does not gain much on the selling of additional coils for any detector that they sell.

In past years they probably have profited more through more sales of detectors by allowing other competing coil manufactures to produce a wide array of available coils at competitive prices.

Two Minelab software changes would allow existing coil manufacturers to very quickly provide a wide variety of coils for the GPX 6000. 

Those changes are to remove the Coil ID and Security check; Replace it with a check to test for a signal/noise present or not present on the Double D receive coil. If a signal/noise is present then a Double D coil is connected. If no signal/noise is detected then a Mono coil is connected.

Removing the ID and Security chip simplifies and reduces manufacturing technical processes and costs. This will provide both a better profit margin for the manufacturer and a reduced cost to the customer. 

In the long run allowing an open competitive coil market will sell more expensive detectors as it has with the previous GPX series machines.

Have a good day,
Chet
 

[WesD]

Chet that would be great, but as it sits now if you want a small coil top end gold detector,  you have to buy a 2300. You want a big dog 19" coil?  You have to but a GPZ. You like that nice midsize 11" hunter, well clean me out! Drop more $ down on a 6000.

Minelab has a pretty good gig going and I dont see them dropping the security chips anytime soon.

We can hope for aftermarket always!

[Jonathan Porter]

There are so many reasons for using crypto in the mix, the obvious being security to prevent counterfeit but also it is to protect the requirements for very finely tuned designs to maximise the way electronics actually work especially the GPX6000! A mono coil seems like a very simple thing to build from a “rank and file” POV but in reality there is a huge amount of science going on in the background to get all the different components of the GPX6000 playing nicely together. Also the crypto is used to identify the coil attached which then triggers the unit to configure its settings protocols. Note: I need to check if that is actually the case, I know it is with the GPZ7000 and am assuming its the same with the GPX6000.

I have boxes and boxes of coils dating back to over 4 years ago that represent the creative path that ultimately lead to what you can now buy from ML, if it was as simple as cutting into an exisiting coil and cobbling together different components from exisiting platforms then why would ML have sent me so many different variations over such a long time span?

Having a dabble and a play is fun if the risk is minimal but to suggest the only reason ML use a chip is to be a selfish bully in there own play ground is very naive. BTW I say that as a reality check and not to offend anyone.?

Here is an an example of where I actually cringed when I saw the image.

I didn’t cringe because I’m an overprotective ML groupie and good on X coils for ‘having a go’, I cringed because I know the GPX6000 intimately and I KNOW what is going to happen with a modification like that!! NDA’s leave me with only a few options and ways to discuss what I’m seeing here so readers will just have to ‘trust’ me on that score. I say all this not to be reactionary or to creat discord or angst in anyone, I say it from many a bitter experience and massive amounts of frustration over long time frames using less than desirable test units. ? 

Other than that this should be fun as we learn to live with the mighty GPX6000, a detector that is definitely going to go down in the annals of history as one of the all time metal detecting ‘greats’. ?  

JP

 

[phrunt]

Yes, the adapter is a proof of concept adapter for testing, not what the final version would look like obviously.

[Jonathan Porter]

1 minute ago, phrunt said:

Yes, the adapter is a proof of concept adapter for testing, not what the final version would look like obviously.

Simon I think your missing my point, any break or connection in the lead is going to be a quagmire of potential hassles and frustration down the road. The GPZ7000 already has issues with X coil connectors being present if you know what to listen for, the 6000 is a whole new animal again. 

 

[phrunt]

It certainly is a very sensitive detector.